Brazilian Politics

The overwhelming majority of my relatives and friends whom I speak to on FB support Bolsonaro. Those who supported anybody else either said nothing - or maybe they didn't vote.

These are people who are middle-class or upper-middle-class and several of whom have been robbed at gunpoint and/or been victims of the corruption and inefficiency that make honest Brazilians suffer. They are tired of paying taxes and sending their kids to expensive private schools only to run the risk of having them kidnapped, and struggling with all that folgado-ness and entitlement (the latter comes w/ millenials and the expansion of leftist ideology, Cultural Marxism, and "we are oppressed, we want reparations in the form of racial quotes in schools" crowd).

They are not racist, they are not fascist, they are not sexist (this includes female relatives and friends), and they are not bigoted.

But they are sick and tired of PT thievery and lying; they are sick and tired of bullcrap and inefficiency and lack of public security.

I feel bad for them. I live in the U.S. and my life doesn't have those problems. But if I were there, I'd be just as pissed off as they are.

Bolsonaro Presidente.

BTW, the Trump parallel is deserved. An outsider who says what people think but lack the spine to do. No wonder Brazil was far safer and more stable in the years of military rule. I'm not saying I want the army in charge, but I do say that perhaps a country like Brazil needs a strongman leader who will get things done and who is willing to piss people off along the way. Democracy works when the population is in general willing to follow laws. That's why it works (for the most part) in the U.S., Canada, Germany (before the migrants arrived), Switzerland. In these countries, you break the law, you pay. Brazil needs that. The PT scum who stole millions only reinforced the cultural of impunity.

I support Bolsonaro just as I support Trump and on October 28, it's going to be a happy evening.

 

I never said it was a factor of the type of government. But the government's policies do have an effect.

Look at how Barack Obama's criticism of police and the rabid anti-police rhetoric from groups like Black Lives Matter affected cops in the United States. They were demoralized to the extent the FBI conducted studies whose results showed local police departments began to withdraw from high-crime areas because of the open hostility they faced and the risk of shooting a person of color and the highly likely wave of condemnation that would bring.

This de-policing led to higher crime rates, which were steadily declining for years.

A horrible comparison, because Bolsonaro isn't going to become Hussein. Not even the generals were like him.

But since you bring up the deceased Iraqi president, I'll say this.

The historical track record shows that as long as Iraqis toed the line and obeyed laws, they were free to live their lives. To marry, to go to school (including women), to watch sports, to have businesses, to sell and to buy. Iraq wasn't a concentration camp. Until 1991, Iraq had one of the Arab world's highest standards of living.

The 1991 and 2003 wars changed all that.

Torture already exists in Brazil. It's the honest, law-abiding, and taxpaying citizens who are tortured emotionally and psychologically daily by bandidos who think they own the country and who get away with murder (literally). If Bolsonaro has to bruise a few bodies (not killing necessarily) to make sure the bandidos (the hundreds of thousands of them) who rape, kidnap, stab, shoot, murder, and rob for a few reais understand they must change their ways, God bless him.

I have had family members robbed at gunpoint more than once and a friend of my father had 4 punks invade his house and torture and shoot him for a few reais. In America those murderers would be looking at life in prison or at least a few decades. In Brazil they'll be out in a few years ready to murder more innocents. But my father's friend's family will still be without their father/husband/provider.

 

You were referring to type of government. I was referring to government policy.

The U.S. example is relevant insofar the fact that the type of government the U.S. has did not change from Obama to Trump; the U.S. was and is still a constitutional republic with a legislative branch and a high court. But the policy towards law enforcement has changed; Obama was known to make statements critical of the police which those left-wing groups such as BLM took as encouragement. Trump from his candidacy, in contrast, supported law enforcement; he mentioned "law and order" at the RNC convention, and both Border Patrol and myriad police departments support him. Border Patrol officially endorsed him, which was the first time it ever did that.

But if Bolsonaro isn't going to turn into Hussein and Brazil won't have the torture cells Ba'ath Iraq had, then it's an irrelevant example.

Fear of what - of murder and torture, or fear of superior force dished out by the agents of the state?

The problem is that a lot of Brazilians have no respect for laws and surely not much for police. The mentality needs to change but that takes a very long time. Until that change has happened, harsh measures are necessary and that includes laws being enforced against those who think committing crimes is fine, especially given crimes have victims.

Yes, crime existed in then. And as bad as it was, it's gotten worse.

A lot of people are just sick and tired. And that includes even homosexuals who support Bolsonaro despite charges he hates the LGBT community.

Women voted for him en masse as well despite claims he's sexist; I speculate the fact women are easier to rob/assault/mug, in general, than men are has to do with that. A gun or knife-wielding criminal can intimidate both genders, but if a large man threatens a small woman with a beating if she won't turn over her purse and if he's got no weapons, an average man can at least try fighting back. Most women can't and don't; rare is the woman who knows BJJ or muay thai and who kicks the crap of an unarmed mugger, regardless of what those YouTube videos show.

 

I may not necessarily go that far, but I insist Brazil needs something new. People are exhausted with the combination of crime and corruption. If both were low, the bad economy, as bad as it is, would still be a problem; but when one struggles to pay the bills, has crooked politicians who suck the people dry, and they can barely go to the padaria or to church or to work because they may get stabbed or shot for a few reais, life can be difficult.

As horrifying as the third one is - if you have millions of impoverished people without education living together, are those people ever going to turn into educated middle-class folks? I fully recognize their humanity, but the painful truth is that certain pockets of the population do not contribute and rather simply consume. They are people who require a "custodial state" and Brazil with all its issues can't afford to do it.

 

Amy Chua, the Chinese-American Tiger Mom writer who raised her children with exceedingly rigorous standards but who ultimately produced very successful young adults, wrote a book named "World On Fire" several years ago.

Among the ideas Chua speaks of in her book is the difference between western countries like the United States, Great Britain, Canada, and Germany, which despite their unique characteristics and cultural differences nonetheless share fundamental and pivotal similarities.

These include an old tradition of the rule of law, a citizenry which generally respects laws, and forms of capitalism and representative government (democracy) which have grown over time and have through experience been enhanced, improved, shaped, and chiseled.

Chua then refers to what I can traditional societies - countries in Africa, the Middle East, and parts of Asia. These were countries with starkly different cultures and ideological heritages. They were tribal and had hierarchies, and notions such as equality before the law, the social obligation to abstain from vigilante justice and to instead depend on state institutions for problem resolution, and of course, capitalism were either non-existent or generations behind the nations of the west. They were often rife with ethnic rivalries.

Once the formerly existing governments (often authoritarian) were removed, well-intentioned but ignorant westerners then instilled or attempted to instill very raw forms of representative democratic government and capitalism to those countries - places where these two institutions simply had no precedent.

This meant capitalism w/o the anti-trust laws, the regulations, etc. of the west and "democracy" without electoral colleges or electoral oversight or such that western countries had long grown accustomed to.

The result were outbreaks of sectarian violence, cronyism, and corruption where a tiny few would amass fabulous wealth while the "99%" would be mired in shocking poverty. Not to mention the use of state power to favor one "tribe" over another.

Not all cultures are the same, and some cultures adapt to western institutions better than others. South Korea, Singapore, Japan, and Taiwan are all unique and differ from each other besides culture and language, but they too were and still are "traditional societies." But over time, to varying extents, they have proven that within their socio-cultural and historical contexts, they could successfully absorb and assimilate western institutions while creating systems based on the rule of law (although in some ways here or there there are still lagging points vis-a-vis western Europe or the United States).

I say all this to make the point that as great as it is to have laws and institutions, the people need to follow them and there has to be accountability. Laws in Brazil are not weak or bad (although some are questionable). But why do even not-too-educated Brazilian immigrants who move to America vow never to return? Is it because they hate Brazil? No, it's because once experiencing life in a first-world country where things work as they should, they see what can be achieved. They don't want to experience the "old" again.

If Jair Bolsonaro wins on Oct. 28, Brazil won't turn into a southern U.S.A. or Canada in 5 or 10 years. No realistic person expects that. But Bolsonaro would at least attempt to make changes to lead the country in the right direction.

In closing - I never thought I'd acknowledge any good deeds by Augusto Pinochet, whose military rule had many victims. But today Chile is the most orderly and socially advanced nation in South America. It may not be at the level of Canada or Switzerland, but the system there works. It has some social problems common to South America, but I do believe that if Pinochet hadn't taken power, Chile wouldn't be where it is today (as much as I feel for the way he and his men disposed of Salvador Allende, who himself in his own ways wanted to help his people and his nation).